I’m not here to argue semantics, the spirit of the law / the spirit of the court case is consistent with their claims of ethnic cleaning, which you already agreed with. Is debating the letter of the law over the spirit of law, when it comes ethnic cleansing, really where you want to sit on your high horse?
I’m not here to argue semantics, the spirit of the law / the spirit of the court case is consistent with their claims of ethnic cleaning, which you already agreed with. Is debating the letter of the law over the spirit of law, when it comes ethnic cleansing, really where you want to sit on your high horse?